Why not 5.0 ? Then it will be like 5.1, 5.2 in the future.  Just asking ..!  


> On 19-Feb-2024, at 10:49 PM, Paul Angus <p...@angus.uk.com.INVALID> wrote:
> 
> Hi Daan,
> 
> Can you clarify what we are actually voting on please.
> 
> In thread that is linked I've seen:
> 
> "[the vote] will be to adjust to the semantic versioning system."
> - you can't go to 20 AND keep semantic versioning. The act of going to 20 
> breaks semantic versioning [1].
> 
> " drop the 4 at version 20 and continue as usual with minor and patch level 
> updates as we have in the past."
> - what's supposed to come next ? in lieu of what would have been 4.21 will it 
> be 21 ?  is it going to be 20.1 then 20.2 ?
> 
> From the thread and how people are referring to 'minor versions', there is a 
> misunderstanding as to what semantic versioning means. For our project its 
> explained here [1].   Major versions meaning "probably going to break a load 
> of people's stuff', with minor versions not breaking stuff (at least not on 
> purpose). So I get calling them minor versions really underplays the changes 
> it can hold.
> 
> 
> I'm going to stick in a -1.  Not as hard 'no' to any changes, but I think the 
> vote should be on 'A change to the version numbering scheme' and then what is 
> proposed properly laid out.  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [1]   https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Releases 
> (section on versioning about 2/3 down)
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com> 
> Sent: Monday, February 19, 2024 12:50 PM
> To: dev <d...@cloudstack.apache.org>
> Cc: users <users@cloudstack.apache.org>
> Subject: [VOTE] next version 20 instead of 4.20
> 
> LS,
> 
> This is a vote on dev@c.a.o with cc to users@c.a.o. If you want to be counted 
> please reply to dev@.
> 
> As discussed in [1] we are deciding to drop the 4 from our versioning scheme. 
> The result would be that the next major version will be 20 instead of 4.20, 
> as it would be in a traditional upgrade. As 20 > 4 and the versions are 
> processed numerically there are no technical impediments.
> 
> +1 agree (next major version as 20
> 0 (no opinion)
> -1 disagree (keep 4.20 as the next version, give a reason)
> 
> As this is a lazy consensus vote any -1 should be accompanied with a reason.
> 
> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/lh45w55c3jmhm7w2w0xgdvlw78pd4p87
> 
> --
> Daan


-- 
This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to 
which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged 
information. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the 
original message and any copy of it from your computer system. You are 
hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this 
communication is strictly prohibited unless proper authorization has been 
obtained for such action. If you have received this communication in error, 
please notify the sender immediately. Although IndiQus attempts to sweep 
e-mail and attachments for viruses, it does not guarantee that both are 
virus-free and accepts no liability for any damage sustained as a result of 
viruses.

Reply via email to